УЗНАЙ ЦЕНУ

(pdf, doc, docx, rtf, zip, rar, bmp, jpeg) не более 4-х файлов (макс. размер 15 Мб)


↑ вверх
Тема/ВариантThe actual character of the paper
ПредметИностранные языки
Тип работыдиплом
Объем работы59
Дата поступления25.12.2012
2500 ₽

Содержание

Contents Preface 2 I. Theory and history of the death penalty 4 1.1. The death penalty worldwide 4 1.2. History of the capital punishment 7 1.3. Methods of execution 12 II. Arguments for and against the death penalty 18 2.1. Arguments in support of the death penalty 18 2.2. Arguments in opposition of the death penalty 22 III. Death penalty in the USA 28 3.1. American death penalty laws 28 3.2. Current issues of the death penalty 47 Conclusion 55 Bibliography 57

Введение

Preface The actual character of the paper. Capital punishment in the United States is officially sanctioned by 38 of the 50 states, as well as by the federal government and the military. The overwhelming majority of executions are performed by the states; the federal government maintains the right to use capital punishment (also known as the death penalty) but does so relatively infrequently. Each state practicing capital punishment has different laws regarding its methods, age limits, and crimes which qualify. The state of Texas has performed more executions than any other state. International developments in the past decade have produced a clear and em-phatic trend away from capital punishment as countries abandon its use, call upon the remaining death penalty states to sharply curtail its use, and formulate international agreements which express a strong preference for an end to all executions. Western Europe has abolished the death penalty; Russia commuted the death sentences of all 700 of its condemned prisoners to life; and the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has called for a moratorium on all executions. The number of countries that have stopped implementing the death penalty has grown to an all-time high of 105. By defying international agreements and turning a deaf ear to the entreaties of its friends, the U.S. is increasingly positioning itself as a human rights violator on this issue. By executing juvenile offenders and the mentally ill; by executing citizens from other countries who were not afforded the simple protections U.S. citizens rou-tinely expect abroad; and by ignoring international norms against expanding the death penalty, the U.S. is showing disrespect for international human rights law both at home and abroad. Capital punishment is a highly charged issue with many groups and prominent individuals participating in the debate. Arguments for and against it are based on moral, practical, religious, and emotional grounds. Advocates of the death penalty argue that it deters crime, improves the community by making sure that convicted criminals do not find their way out onto the streets to offend again, and is cheaper than keeping convicted criminals in high security prison for the rest of their natural lives. Opponents of the death penalty claim that \"capital punishment cheapens human life and puts government on the same low moral level as criminals who have taken life.\" The potential costs to the U.S. will be measured in loss of leadership and pres-tige, endangerment of the rights of U.S. citizens abroad, disrespect for international law and the tribunals which protect it, and a lost opportunity to be part of a funda-mental change in the status of human rights at the start of the 21st Century. The aim and the tasks of the paper. The aim of the paper is to study institute of the death penalty in the USA. The object of the study is the process of functioning of the death penalty, the subject is relations and contradictions, bases and specific character of death penalty laws in different states. To achieve this aim there were set following tasks: 1) to consider the present situation with the death penalty worldwide; 2) to examine the history of the death penalty in the US; 3) to scan the methods of the execution; 4) to analyse the arguments for and against the death penalty; 5) to investigate american death penalty laws; 6) and to uncover current issues of the death penalty. The structure of the paper. The paper consists of preface, 3 chapters, conclu-sion and bibliography.

Заключение

Conclusion The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the execution of a convicted crimi-nal by the State as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offences. Historically, the execution of criminals and political opponents was used by nearly all societies – both to punish crime and to suppress political dissent. Among democratic countries around the world, most European and Latin American states have abolished capital punishment while the United States, Guatemala, and most of the Caribbean as well as democracies in Asia and Africa retain it. Among non-democratic countries, the use of the death penalty is common but not universal. There are following authorized methods of execution: hanging, lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad. Capital punishment is a contentious issue. Supporters of capital punishment ar-gue that it deters crime, prevents recidivism, and is an appropriate punishment for the crime of murder. Opponents of capital punishment argue that it does not deter crimi-nals more than life imprisonment, violates human rights, leads to executions of some who are wrongfully convicted, and discriminates against minorities and the poor. The death penalty for violent criminals and murderers should be introduced in every State which has a developed judicial system. It brings forth the greatest possi-ble justice for society and the victim of crimes. Punishment must be held in propor-tion to the crime for justice to be served. And justice – not humanity – must be the cornerstone by which ruthless violent criminals and murderers shall be judged. It shows the greatest respect for the ordinary man’s – and especially the victim of crimes – inviolable value. Society acknowledges and exalts the value of the lives of victims of crime on the most visible way by punishing violent criminals and murder-ers with death. It recognizes man’s natural sense of justice. It has been put down in man that the most heinous outrage must have the most severe punishment. It effec-tively stops violent criminals and murderers from committing more crimes. It con-firms and highly values all ordinary men’s \"right to life\". On the other hand, heinous violent criminals and murderers are not embraced by this right and neither are prison-ers by the \"right to freedom\". The right to life is a \'human right\' concept which from it’s beginning approves of capital punishment. It creates a little more safety in society for all citizens. When violent criminals and murderers are gone forever, a more peaceful society will be crated. Imprisonment can never bring about that kind of safety. It removes, from an economical viewpoint, the entire offensive elements that are found today in alternative penalties to capital punishment. But there are also reasons against death penalty. The death penalty is the ulti-mate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. It violates the right to life. It is ir-revocable and can be inflicted on the innocent. It has never been shown to deter crime more effectively than other punishments. When we discuss the death penalty, what we are really talking about is the safety of the community. There are many ways to make the community safer, and most of these have costs associated with them. The costs of the death penalty are cen-tral because they play the key role in how the death penalty is implemented. Support-ers and opponents of the death penalty agree that a system of capital punishment should not take unnecessary risks with innocent lives and should be applied with a strict sense of fairness. As with many things, the death penalty on the cheap is really no bargain. There is no abstract dollar figure for the cost of the death penalty – it de-pends on what kind of death penalty. The power of the innocence issue is that it throws open a window onto all capi-tal cases as it sheds light on the fallibility of the justice system. People have always known that the system can make mistakes. But the numbers of people being released, the scientific credibility lent by DNA testing, the high media profile of many of these cases, along with the fact that an execution looms in the background, have all con-tributed to the greater impact of the innocence issue. No one supports the execution of an innocent person. But these cases also raise the specter of doubt about a much larger class of capital cases: those where the defendant may be guilty, but about whom it is impossible to be certain.

Литература

Bibliography 1. \"Society\'s Final Solution: A History and Discussion of the Death Penalty\", L. Randa, editor, University Press of America, 1997. 2. \"The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies\", H. Bedau, editor, Ox-ford University Press, 1997. 3. Albuquerque Journal, 12/19/01. 4. Associated Press, 10/31/01. 5. Associated Press, 3/26/02. 6. Associated Press, 8/4/01. 7. Associated Press, August 4, 2004. 8. Associated Press, February 14, 2003. 9. Associated Press, July 29, 2003. 10. Associated Press, June 18, 2003. 11. Associated Press, March 24, 2004. 12. Associated Press, May 9, 2002. 13. Associated Press, November 10, 2004. 14. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Capital Punishment 1996 Bulletin, Table 2 (Dec. 1997); updated by DPIC. 15. C. Hoppe, \"Executions Cost Texas Millions\", Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992. 16. Californians for a Moratorium on Executions, Press Release, 10/30/01. 17. Cathleen Burnett, \"Justice Denied\", Northeastern University Press, 2002. 18. D. Von Drehle, \"Bottom Line: Life in Prison One-sixth as Expensive\", The Mi-ami Herald, July 10, 1988. 19. Executive Summary: The Disposition of Nebraska Capital and Non-Capital Homicide Cases (1973-1999); A Legal and Empirical Analysis. 20. Gallup Press Release, June 2, 2004. 21. H. Hillman, \"The Possible Pain Experienced During Executions by Different Methods,\" 22 Perception 745 (1992). 22. Houston Chronicle, June 18, 2003. 23. J. Weisberg, \"This is Your Death\", The New Republic, July 1, 2002. 24. K. O\'Shea, \"Women and the Death Penalty in the United States, 1900-19980\", Praeger 1999. 25. Michigan Live, March 19, 2004. 26. Minneapolis Star Tribune, January 28, 2004. 27. N.Y. Times, December 14, 2003. 28. New Haven Advocate, January 15, 2004. 29. New Jerseyans for a Death Penalty Moratorium, Press Release, Jan. 12, 2004. 30. NY Times, 12/30/01. 31. P. Cook, \"The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina\", Duke Uni-versity (May 1993). 32. Philadelphia Inquirer, 7/11/02. 33. R. Bohm, \"Deathquest: An Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Capital Punishment in the United States\", Anderson Publishing, 1999. 34. R. Gold, \"Counties Struggle with High Cost of Prosecuting Death-Penalty Cases\", Wall St. Journal, Jan. 9, 2002. 35. Reno Gazette-Journal, June 23, 2003. 36. S. Maganini, \"Closing Death Row Would Save State $90 Million a Year\", Sac-ramento Bee, March 28, 1988. 37. S. V. Date, \"The High Price of Killing Killers\", Palm Beach Post, Jan. 4, 2000. 38. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, June 7, 2002. 39. The Bureau of Justice Statistics, Capital Punishment 2004, November 2005, NCJ 211349. 40. The Enquirer, November 11, 2004. 41. The Oklahoman, May 26, 2002. 42. The Sun-Sentinel of Florida and The Union Leader of New Hampshire, April 27, 2004. 43. The Sun-Sentinel of Florida and The Union Leader of New Hampshire, April 27, 2004. 44. Tucson Citizen, editorial, August 6, 2002. 45. W. Schabas, \"The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law\", Cam-bridge University Press, second edition, 1997.
Уточнение информации

+7 913 789-74-90
info@zauchka.ru
группа вконтакте